Mini 1064 - Charlie's Town (Game Over!)

[Charlie]

Vote count 2

RichardGHP (4) - Shotty to the Body, Casus Belli, q21, FakeGod
masfloohinev (4) - Reckamonic, Substrike22, Nachomamma8, Cogito Ergo Sum
Shotty to the Body (3) - masfloohinev, jmurph3, SpyreX
Nachomamma8 (1) - RichardGHP

Not voting: No one!
With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

[Casus Belli]

@Spyre: Protest what exactly? He voted without posting a word of reason which isn't excusable even in the RVS and then turns it into some sort of terrible gambit when he gets called out on it. Oh, and it's drawing votes away from GHP who he throws a weak FOS at to distance with.

We're struggling to believe this reasoning is sincere, simply because you didn't question and pressure FakeGod who essentially did the same thing as Mas in post 42

For example, I am thinking FakeGod is scum based on his response to my vote for Shotty.

Why? FakeGod issued no explanation for his post so how do you know the vote is a reaction or a response to your vote on Shotty? Also, if FakeGod is scum for this move, doesn't that also reflect on you in a scummy manner, since you also made a reasonless vote?

A reasonless vote isn't useless, it's a good scum-tell! At any stage in the game, scum often have trouble scum-hunting and weakness like your reasonless vote and the FoS on GHP are signs of it.

You're reaching here. The game has just started and while it is true that scum have more trouble scum hunting for obvious reasons, at this point, so do the town. We're on page three and you are trying to apply a tell that is significantly stronger and carries much more weight later in the game

I have no comment on the RVS wagon on me, but please do not refer to me as GHP. Instead, call me Richard.

Why no comment?

I've made two RVS votes, and since RVS is now over, it's time to get serious. Nacho's vote in post 68 causes a reaffirmation of my intitial vote on him.

Reaffirms? You realize that you simply random voted Nacho, there is nothing to back up here. This feels like you are trying to make your vote stronger than what it actually is. Also, your vote on Shotty does not scream random to us due to the context of everything else going on in the game. Can you explain how being the forth vote on a bandwagon still qualifies as a random vote?

mas reads as town right off the bat and Nacho has posted 3 times thus far. Meanwhile, none of those posts are even remotely exonerating or content-laden.

Looking at your ISO, you have made 7 posts, with one (the latest) being the only “content” post. Essentially, you were guilty of the same thing until just now. so... Why is it scummy again?

[jmurph3]

...and this thread exploded with posts in the last 24 hours.

A more content-filled post to follow later today.

[RichardGHP]

@Casus, in order:

-I'm fairly certain I'm protected against self-incrimination by the 5th amendment.

-I think it's fair to say that RVS was still in play, so elements of that, plus self-preservation (necessary during RVS). Trust me, every member in this game will do the latter at some point. Shotty has not done a lot, if anything, to make me think he is or could be scum at this stage.

-If Nacho makes a post that I think I townie would make, I'll consider unvoting him. Not necessarily a scumtell, per se, but I know Nacho to have a pro-town meta and suspect he would have some insight to offer by now. Note that he also has the "third on the wagon is scum" tell that I've heard about working against him, on one of my townreads no less.

[Nachomamma8]

Now, normally I don't bother to read walls of text in the first 5 pages of a game (61, 63), since they're normally just filled with overthought, terrible reason that only hit scum by virtue of sheer luck, but things stood out to me in these walls, so I read them through.

I found it interesting that Shotty was willing to attack mas's reasonless vote, which he said was "inexcusable even in the RVS", but completely ignore FakeGod's reasonless vote, which was on a much bigger wagon at the time. His reaction to SpyreX is also scummy in its own right; he ignores the question at the end of post #64, instead criticizing SpyreX's playstyle a bit more and stating that he was making points on his top scum reads, as if he was trying to imply that SpyreX wasn't (ironically enough, he hadn't even mentioned Richard up to this point).

So,

Unvote, Vote: Shotty to the Body

.

As to responding to Richard, there's not much to respond to except to say that I'm flattered you think I have a protown meta <3. And I'll point out that the "third on the wagon scum" tell should be weaker on someone you think is town as opposed to someone you know is town...

[Reckamonic]

Awesomely informative post coming from us later this evening.
Promise!

[masfloohinev]

@Substrike - Those reasons for voting me are very bad.
FakeGod - Where's my vote? My vote is on somebody else I suspect. Where's your contributions?
Casus Belli - I suspected FakeGod's reaction to the vote not because it was a reasonless vote, but because he ignored my vote for Shotty.

I'm not too impressed with Casus Belli or Nachomamma. Casus Bellis asks lots of questions and gave absolutely no reads/votes. The suspicion of Nacomamma is because he voted me for my case against Shotty (post 61) but in post 79 he says he hadn't read the post. How could he have voted me for a post he hadn't read? What exactly was wrong with it? In addition, the vote switch looks odd... especially when he voted me (for voting Shotty) and then switched to Shotty anyway. I could see either of those two being scum, but I

do

currently have quite a few scumreads at the moment.

Response to Shotty coming up next.

[Nachomamma8]

Mas: First of all, why do you have to give reads/votes in every post? Doesn't it make sense to also ask questions in your posts, so you might develop better reads and thus make more accurate votes...?

Second of all, you're putting reasons to my vote when there's none to find. I quoted a post of yours, then voted you. I didn't actually state any reasons whatsoever for voting you.

{Shotty
FakeGod
jmurph}

[Cas
mas
Richard]

[masfloohinev]

So I was dead-on in my quote of you from before where you're herp derping fishing for a reason to vote someone. How is the single word 'why?' an "inordinate amount on interest." Considering you voted without saying anything isn't it a fair question? If you were voting him for having a 'q' in his name all you had to do was say so. Your vote may or may not've been serious, I didn't know since you said nothing, you could've been pushing a policy lynch for all I knew at the time so I asked for clarification.

Ftr, I didn't actually vote q21 because he has a q in his name. That was sarcasm. I still just find it wierd that you thought my vote could've been serious when it followed nothing else but other random votes.

A reasonless vote isn't useless, it's a good scum-tell! At any stage in the game, scum often have trouble scum-hunting and weakness like your reasonless vote and the FoS on GHP are signs of it.

Oh please! There are so many things wrong with this. First of all, you are coming up with nonsense to get around the point I'm getting across. Do you seriously think that my reasonless vote wasn't useless? Secondly, I feel like you are calling me stupid. I am not. I could easily cast a random vote and add random reasoning to it if I wanted to as scum. Me not doing so doesn't mean it is because I am scum that doesn't know how to pretend I'm town. How exactly does the FoS of RichardGHP show that I have trouble scumhunting? It is giving an indication of my read of him which is scumhunting.

As for taking votes away from him, he was at what 4? That's over halfway to lynch, you wouldn't want your scum-friend getting caught by a stupid RVS wagon, so of course you would try to shift focus if the two of you were buddies. I believe you're behavior was taking the pressure off of GHP, RVS or not I don't really see how that gives you an excuse.

Oh please! Keep in mind my vote had no reasons. You can't possibly think I was expecting to start a bandwagon on you.

GHP is as good a push as any at this point in the game, at the beginning you have little to no evidence on anyone. [1: It's not like he's done anything to make me think better of him], [2: he's letting you fight his battle] and [3: his only post since I voted him was OMGUS after two people had already voted me]. Your FoS links you to him as you're covering all your bases at that point by simultaneously attacking (via FoS) and [4: defending him (in this post saying I have no points on him)]. [5: If GHP is town his odds of being a VT are greater than his odds of being a PR, so why not push it?] Especially, when I'll have a fairly solid opinion on your alignment if he flips scum. Even if the wagon goes nowhere, we're still generating information right now instead of sitting around so what the fuck why not? If you want to be frank, mas, I'm still on his wagon because it's bigger than yours is right now and I'm indifferent to lynching either of you.

1: The same could be said of several people. This is the wrong mentality if you are using this reasoning to call people scum on page 4.
2: What battle? What the heck are you talking about? There are no points you have brought up against him?
3: So basically your suspicion of him comes down to OMGUS, because the other points mean nothing. Why didn't you bring up this point before? I am pretty sure you suspected me for not revealing all my thoughts.
4: That's not me defending him, that's me attacking you.
5: I don't think you should really be saying these kinds of things. It might be a form of rolefishing.

The purpose of the reasonless vote and giving reasons later was because I wanted to see how people reacted and what sort of actions they took in response before they knew the reasons. For example, I am thinking FakeGod is scum based on his response to my vote for Shotty.

So are you saying we're buddies or what? You still haven't explained why I'm scummy, all you've done is contest my arguments which isn't the same thing (townies can be wrong after all). Your all or nothing attitude towards alignment is incorrect at best.

You are not necessarily buddies. Keep in mind this is page 4 we're talking about. I haven't figured out who the scumteam is yet.

No, those are not the only reasons for my vote for you. I'm voting you for questioning my RVS vote and bad logic in your later posts, not because I think your reads are necessarily wrong. What do you mean by all or nothing attitude?

I still don't like Shotty's logic but I'm thinking he might just be inexperienced and gut is telling me he might be town. I would like to

Unvote. Vote: FakeGod

instead. I would love to hear more from CES as well.

[masfloohinev]

Mas: First of all, why do you have to give reads/votes in every post? Doesn't it make sense to also ask questions in your posts, so you might develop better reads and thus make more accurate votes...?

Second of all, you're putting reasons to my vote when there's none to find. I quoted a post of yours, then voted you. I didn't actually state any reasons whatsoever for voting you.

Firstly, I'm fine with the way I've been playing, thanks.
Secondly, why

did

you vote for me then?

{Shotty
FakeGod
jmurph}

[Cas
mas
Richard]

?

[Nachomamma8]

It's arrogant to call someone inexperienced when they have a year more of experience than you...

Firstly, I'm fine with the way I've been playing, thanks.

I'm referring to your suspicion of Casus Belli.

Secondly, why did you vote for me then?

Because that was an overly long post for page 4, and I figured it was chock-full of reaching as a result.

[q21]

Some comments

-snip-
The purpose of the reasonless vote and giving reasons later was because I wanted to see how people reacted and what sort of actions they took in response before they knew the reasons. For example, I am thinking FakeGod is scum based on his response to my vote for Shotty.

The snipped part of this post is generic rationalisation and is neither here nor there at this point in the game. The quoted section is bad, not scummy, but bad. A reasonless RVS vote is a poor reaction trigger because the reaction you're going to get is almost invariably the question: "Why?"

@Casus, in order:

1. I'm fairly certain I'm protected against self-incrimination by the 5th amendment.

2. I think it's fair to say that RVS was still in play, so elements of that, plus self-preservation (necessary during RVS). Trust me, every member in this game will do the latter at some point. Shotty has not done a lot, if anything, to make me think he is or could be scum at this stage.

3. If Nacho makes a post that I think I townie would make, I'll consider unvoting him. Not necessarily a scumtell, per se, but I know Nacho to have a pro-town meta and suspect he would have some insight to offer by now. Note that he also has the "third on the wagon is scum" tell that I've heard about working against him, on one of my townreads no less.

1. This is not the USA. There are no amendments to protect you from anything. This is mafia and refusal to comment on a fairly significant wagon on yourself is scummy - especially since the above quote infers that any comment you could make would incriminate you. I'd quite like to know what that comment might have been.
2. Be honest. There was no RVS in there, it was all self-preservation.
3. Meh.

@Substrike - Those reasons for voting me are very bad.
FakeGod - Where's my vote? My vote is on somebody else I suspect. Where's your contributions?
Casus Belli - I suspected FakeGod's reaction to the vote not because it was a reasonless vote, but because he ignored my vote for Shotty.

I'm not too impressed with Casus Belli or Nachomamma. Casus Bellis asks lots of questions and gave absolutely no reads/votes.

The suspicion of Nacomamma is because he voted me for my case against Shotty (post 61) but in post 79 he says he hadn't read the post.

How could he have voted me for a post he hadn't read? What exactly was wrong with it? In addition, the vote switch looks odd... especially when he voted me (for voting Shotty) and then switched to Shotty anyway. I could see either of those two being scum, but I

do

currently have quite a few scumreads at the moment.

Response to Shotty coming up next.

In response to the bolded, try reading 71 more closely:

Now, normally I don't bother to read walls of text in the first 5 pages of a game (61, 63), since they're normally just filled with overthought, terrible reason that only hit scum by virtue of sheer luck,

but things stood out to me in these walls, so I read them through.

-snip-

The bolded here quite clearly states that he did read them. Now the question is: Are you careless enough that you didn't notice that, or are you scum trying to force some suspicion on the back of an incorrect reason? I'm not sure yet.

As for taking votes away from him, he was at what 4? That's over halfway to lynch, you wouldn't want your scum-friend getting caught by a stupid RVS wagon, so of course you would try to shift focus if the two of you were buddies. I believe you're behavior was taking the pressure off of GHP, RVS or not I don't really see how that gives you an excuse.

Oh please! Keep in mind my vote had no reasons. You can't possibly think I was expecting to start a bandwagon on you.

Well actually, the very fact that your vote was reasonless gives Shotty every right to ascribe to it whatever reason makes most sense to him. He can think what he likes and his thought isn't all that bad.

[Shotty to the Body]

I found it interesting that Shotty was willing to attack mas's reasonless vote, which he said was "inexcusable even in the RVS", but completely ignore FakeGod's reasonless vote, which was on a much bigger wagon at the time. His reaction to SpyreX is also scummy in its own right; he ignores the question at the end of post #64, instead criticizing SpyreX's playstyle a bit more and stating that he was making points on his top scum reads, as if he was trying to imply that SpyreX wasn't (ironically enough, he hadn't even mentioned Richard up to this point).

So,

Unvote, Vote: Shotty to the Body

.

I replied to Spyre's question. If you read carefully I address the point in 66. As for missing fakegod's vote, I literally missed it as I was focused on mahfloos replies at the time, so take that for whatever it's worth.

Oh please! Keep in mind my vote had no reasons. You can't possibly think I was expecting to start a bandwagon on you.

q21 else already addressed this pretty well I thought.

I still don't like Shotty's logic but I'm thinking he might just be inexperienced

From a townsperson el oh el. Are you an alt? Just curious, not actually game relevant.

1: The same could be said of several people. This is the wrong mentality if you are using this reasoning to call people scum on page 4.
2: What battle? What the heck are you talking about? There are no points you have brought up against him?
3: So basically your suspicion of him comes down to OMGUS, because the other points mean nothing. Why didn't you bring up this point before? I am pretty sure you suspected me for not revealing all my thoughts.
4: That's not me defending him, that's me attacking you.
5: I don't think you should really be saying these kinds of things. It might be a form of rolefishing.

1. Like who? Richard pinged my radar and has gotten progressively worst, I can't really say that about anyone else as of yet.
2. You're not letting him defend himself.
3. No, the other points do mean things and I was voting him before that regardless, OMGUS is a small form of confirmation.
4. It's both really.
5. Na, didn't ask or prompt or imply for him to reveal role info.
----

I like my vote where it is, I agree with q21 here:

1. This is not the USA. There are no amendments to protect you from anything. This is mafia and refusal to comment on a fairly significant wagon on yourself is scummy - especially since the above quote infers that any comment you could make would incriminate you. I'd quite like to know what that comment might have been.
2. Be honest. There was no RVS in there, it was all self-preservation.
3. Meh.

[Nachomamma8]

So, what's the dealio. Is it "no information" or is it "Richard is scum and the wagon on me is scum saving scum".

This question, specifically?

[RichardGHP]

I'm liking this surge of activity, inquisition (don't berate me for incorrect spelling if there's any, I'm tired) and explanations from Nacho thus far.

Unvote

Expect more today or tomorrow.

[Substrike22]

@masfloos, No, they're not bad reasons. Your argument is bad. You cast suspicion towards GHP even though he didn't really do anything suspicious, because you know something we don't. But, you'd rather FoS him because it's your scum buddy and you don't want to push that wagon very hard. Now you're trying to make it look like a bad play because that's exactly what you did. I've seen scum do it time and time again. You're appearing to contribute without casting a vote. Unless you'd care to provide a reasonable explanation as to why you're bothering with an FoS on page 3, I want to see you flip so I know what GHP is. I didn't even suspect GHP until you FoS'd him.

[Substrike22]

EBWOP: I haven't read the last 3-5 posts aka the walls of text, will do that later tonight. So the previous comment is made without those posts in mind.

[jmurph3]

Ok, so having read over everything, including some walls of text that, for being 7 pages into D1, make my eyes bleed, I am inclined to say that at least one of Shotty vs. masfloovinev is scum. There is naturally potential that they're both scum, though I'm less inclined to believe it. On a pureply gut level, I think that mas is at this point more likely to be scum. His reactions seem a bit over the top to be purely town. Part of this comes simply from the fact that I know Shotty's playstyle better, but every time someone shuts down one of mas's arguments, he seems to get more and more agitated. The only motivation that I can see for this is cornered scum.

FoS: Masfloovinev

.

Why an FoS only, you say? Because I'm really intrigued by the interaction between q21 and Shotty. Look at the following quotes:

Haha guessing, fine. "DERP DERP NO EXPLANATION VOTE OMG SOMEONE QUESTIONED ME DEFENDING SCUM HERP LOLOLOL"

That pretty much sums it up yes?

Close, but not quite. I'll explain later. BTW, this post is scummy too.

Personally, I hate this "I'll explain later" crap. If you have a point, make it.

Shhh, he might get away with bullshitting a point later if you don't speak up!

(Mind you, this was following mas's random vote on q21, which Shotty noted and which started this whole thing. I'm not saying that I think Shotty's reaction was irrational

, but it is interesting that he focused on this one only)

q21 else already addressed this pretty well I thought.


----

I like my vote where it is, I agree with q21 here:

1. This is not the USA. There are no amendments to protect you from anything. This is mafia and refusal to comment on a fairly significant wagon on yourself is scummy - especially since the above quote infers that any comment you could make would incriminate you. I'd quite like to know what that comment might have been.
2. Be honest. There was no RVS in there, it was all self-preservation.
3. Meh.

q21 tries to distance himself, but within the same post, fails to do so:

In response to the bolded, try reading 71 more closely:

Now, normally I don't bother to read walls of text in the first 5 pages of a game (61, 63), since they're normally just filled with overthought, terrible reason that only hit scum by virtue of sheer luck,

but things stood out to me in these walls, so I read them through.

-snip-

The bolded here quite clearly states that he did read them. Now the question is: Are you careless enough that you didn't notice that, or are you scum trying to force some suspicion on the back of an incorrect reason? I'm not sure yet.

----

Well actually, the very fact that your vote was reasonless gives Shotty every right to ascribe to it whatever reason makes most sense to him. He can think what he likes and his thought isn't all that bad.

Both q21 and Shotty seem to be operating very closely. IGMEO(both of)Y. And my vote on Shotty stands for the moment.

[FakeGod]

Ok, so having read over everything, including some walls of text that, for being 7 pages into D1, make my eyes bleed, I am inclined to say that at least one of Shotty vs. masfloovinev is scum. There is naturally potential that they're both scum, though I'm less inclined to believe it.

hmm I'm always suspicious of a counterwagon, since they tend to develop when initial wagon caught a scum and his/her buddies try to save him/her by building another wagon.

Of course, the alternative is that we caught 2 town, and scum are fueling both sides, but nevertheless, I'm going to stay with my original vote till further developments.

[Shotty to the Body]

So, what's the dealio. Is it "no information" or is it "Richard is scum and the wagon on me is scum saving scum".

This question, specifically?

It's not that black and white. Post 66. Answered it. Moving on.

More tomorrow, don't have time to read the walls tonight, test tomorrow morning.

[SpyreX]

That's not an answer to that question in the slightest.

You're quotes are pointless when it's essentially the whole ISO (5/6 post-start posts) with zero explanation. Post 50 was hyperbole if you want to get technical, the point was focused at mahfloo and OMGUS from GHP. "Little to no" doesn't mean zero either, Richard and mahfloogsfaslk are the best bet right now in my opinion, so I'm voting them and laying out some points. If you want to sit around and wait til page 10 to start I'll just back off and we can twiddle our thumbs and not generate any info.

1.) Having your iso there illustrates the point better than any words can. If I need to get the diagrams out for those still trying to see what was going on well sure but thats some wasted effort sooo.

2.) I'm not surprised in the slightest you're saying "Scum team to the rescue with a counterwagon!" was joking or hyperbole or, well, any other shuck and move manuever to distance from that F-- of F--'s.

3.) Little to no doesn't mean zero. This is true. HOWEVER, it sure doesn't mean, again "Richard is scum and the wagon on me is scum saving scum". So, again (and I'll update it): So, what's the dealio. Is it " little to no information" or is it "Richard is scum and the wagon on me is scum saving scum".

4.) What in the name of anything holy does this have with "OHH YOU WANT NO READS OR ANYTHING LETS JUST DO NOTHING"

Seriously.

[masfloohinev]

Nachomamma, I'm an alt. I

still

think players should have at least one read with the amount of serious discussion there is to work with. Also, now that you have read the case, what do you think about it?

q21 -

1. I disagree with your comments regarding my post. Concerning the reasonless vote for Shotty, you say that it is likely I'll get the response "Why?", but I have already gotten two much more telling reactions than that. Shotty responded by trying to laugh it off and FakeGod responded by ignoring it. If Shotty does flip scum later, than these reactions will be very helpful for determining his buddies. You are underestimating the power of reactions.

2. I could ask you the same thing. Why don't you pay attention:

Because that was an overly long post for page 4, and

I figured

it was chock-full of reaching as a result.

I thought Nachomamma had not read my post based on what he said in 79 and I was right when Nachomamma clearly states here that he hadn't. If he had read my post when he voted me, then why would he have had to make guesses about what was in it?

3. The reason for my vote has nothing to do with this. The point is that you can't say that I was expecting a bandwagon with a reasonless vote. How often does that ever happen? The logic is just stupid.


Shotty -

1. No he didn't.

2. Yeah, I am an alt.

3.1: You said one of your reasons for the vote was because there was no reason for you to think better of him. This is a terrible reason for this early in the game. It translates to you voting him because he doesn't seem like town yet to you. This reasoning should apply to several other players: jmurph, Reckamonic, or even FakeGod. What have they done to make you think better of them?

3.2: Defend himself against what? Where have I addressed any of the points against him? All I have done is tell you your attack is stupid.

3.3: How the heck do the other points mean anything? "Because there is no reason not to think better of him," which is dumb, and "Because he is letting you fight his battles," which is not true, are the only points you have given.

3.5: Well regardless of if it was rolefishing or not, why would you be helping scum figure out his role?


Substrike - You are reaching. What is so wrong about an FoS on page 3? Nothing. I FoSed RichardGHP for post 49: I didn't see the need for the post other than scum possibly trying to justify their vote so it doesn't get attacked. I'm not going to continue arguing against this point because I honestly think it sucks and I don't know how to convince you otherwise.


jmurph - I'm honestly more annoyed at the terrible points being brought up against me that are being considered valid. Also, I find it odd that you FoS me for finding me more suspicious than Shotty but then proceed to tell us that you think Shotty and q21 might be buddies. I don't get it. Also, why no vote?

[masfloohinev]

Is nobody else concerned with FakeGod's failure to contribute anything but usless one liners?

[q21]

Ok, so having read over everything, including some walls of text that, for being 7 pages into D1, make my eyes bleed, I am inclined to say that at least one of Shotty vs. masfloovinev is scum. There is naturally potential that they're both scum, though I'm less inclined to believe it. On a pureply gut level, I think that mas is at this point more likely to be scum. His reactions seem a bit over the top to be purely town. Part of this comes simply from the fact that I know Shotty's playstyle better, but every time someone shuts down one of mas's arguments, he seems to get more and more agitated. The only motivation that I can see for this is cornered scum.

FoS: Masfloovinev

.

I'd like to point out a direct contradiction at this point. Here you state that you feel that Mas is scummier than Shotty - despite the fact that you claim the reason is purely gut, you do actually give a half-decent reason for viewing Mas as scummier. My problem arises from the fact that you only FoS Mas and you leave your vote sitting right where it was: Shotty.

VOTE: jmurph
Much more interesting than voting Richard.

q21 tries to distance himself, but within the same post, fails to do so:

Please explain, I don't recall trying to distance from anything.
As for how closely Shotty and I are playing at this point - the possibility of Shotty buddying up has occurred to me, but I'm incline to believe that we're a pair of townies who have been linked by mas's reasonless vote on one and then an immediate jump to a reasonless vote on the other.

q21 -

1. I disagree with your comments regarding my post. Concerning the reasonless vote for Shotty, you say that it is likely I'll get the response "Why?", but I have already gotten two much more telling reactions than that. Shotty responded by trying to laugh it off and FakeGod responded by ignoring it. If Shotty does flip scum later, than these reactions will be very helpful for determining his buddies. You are underestimating the power of reactions.

2. I could ask you the same thing. Why don't you pay attention:

Because that was an overly long post for page 4, and

I figured

it was chock-full of reaching as a result.

I thought Nachomamma had not read my post based on what he said in 79 and I was right when Nachomamma clearly states here that he hadn't. If he had read my post when he voted me, then why would he have had to make guesses about what was in it?

3. The reason for my vote has nothing to do with this. The point is that you can't say that I was expecting a bandwagon with a reasonless vote. How often does that ever happen? The logic is just stupid.

1. Maybe I am, but I don't think so. This point comes down to personal opinion and I don't see any point in pursuing it. If you can help find scum based on those reactions I'll happily eat my words.

2. This attempt at a defense fails. The post you're using as your defense now is Nacho's post 85. However, you first suspect Nacho in your post 81 for not reading you post - you use his post 79 as proof of this. The problem is that 79 is the direct opposite of proof that he didn't read you case - 79 says that he did read it. The fact that 85 potentially (and its only potentially, not definitely) adds some weight to your accusation doesn't look great for Nacho, but it also doesn't change the fact that when you made that accusation you were essentially pulling it out your ass.

3. It may not be the most likely thing in the world, but it is a possibility and since you gave no reason of your own its a possibility that other people are well within their rights to explore. Personally, I'm thinking that the people who came after you are more likely to have been pushing it as a counter wagon. This time around Richard gets a pass based on the fact that self defense is perfectly reasonable from town on page 2, that leaves jmurph and Spyrex. Given this point and the contradiction pointed out at the top of this post I think I like my jmurph vote very much.

[jmurph3]

Ok, so having read over everything, including some walls of text that, for being 7 pages into D1, make my eyes bleed, I am inclined to say that at least one of Shotty vs. masfloovinev is scum. There is naturally potential that they're both scum, though I'm less inclined to believe it. On a pureply gut level, I think that mas is at this point more likely to be scum. His reactions seem a bit over the top to be purely town. Part of this comes simply from the fact that I know Shotty's playstyle better, but every time someone shuts down one of mas's arguments, he seems to get more and more agitated. The only motivation that I can see for this is cornered scum.

FoS: Masfloovinev

.

I'd like to point out a direct contradiction at this point. Here you state that you feel that Mas is scummier than Shotty - despite the fact that you claim the reason is purely gut, you do actually give a half-decent reason for viewing Mas as scummier. My problem arises from the fact that you only FoS Mas and you leave your vote sitting right where it was: Shotty.

Here's the thing: Mas's playstyle is very reactionary at this point. If I switch my vote to him, OMG, he reacts in an angry fashion. There'd be no difference in his reaction than what he's done before and probably nothing that we would learn from it. So instead, I left my vote where it is because I think it's much more interesting to note the connection between you and Shotty, and something that I would prefer to explore more before I move my vote elsewhere, especially since my read on mas is a gut-read, and I don't typically hold much with my gut.

q21 tries to distance himself, but within the same post, fails to do so:

Please explain, I don't recall trying to distance from anything.
As for how closely Shotty and I are playing at this point - the possibility of Shotty buddying up has occurred to me, but I'm incline to believe that we're a pair of townies who have been linked by mas's reasonless vote on one and then an immediate jump to a reasonless vote on the other.

If you read the quote that I have immediately following, you would see that you speak against Shotty (in a flimsy sense) and then go on in the same post to parrot him again. That was what I meant by distancing.

This time around Richard gets a pass based on the fact that self defense is perfectly reasonable from town on page 2, that leaves jmurph and Spyrex. Given this point and the contradiction pointed out at the top of this post I think I like my jmurph vote very much.

The problem that I have with this argument that you and some others are making is that you're assuming that the counterwagon must be a scumteam trying to protect one of their own. This to me does not have to be the case. I'm not denying the possibility, since I can only speak from my own perspective, but when I come into the game, about to make my first vote in RVS, and I see an L-2 wagon on page 2, I get a little nervous about that. At least two players (Spyrex and Nachomamma - might've been one more that I missed) hadn't posted yet either, and putting someone at L-1 on page 2 when opportunistic scum could easily end the day just seems silly to me. Instead, going after the prime player on the first wagon is a great way to gauge reactions. My point is that you're only looking at the counter-wagon as if it has scum motivations, and this seems a little short-sighted to me.